OT: Raiders to Vegas

Submitted by MGoCali on
I live in the Bay Area, and as much as raiders fans suck, this is a gut punch to Oakland. The NFL hates its fans.

Mr. Owl

March 27th, 2017 at 8:49 PM ^

Similar situation, in that you get rid of an owner that you should be glad to get out of town, but at least with Cleveland the league was smart enough to force the franchise to leave behind the name/history.

Let's just hope things get really ugly this season for the Raiders.  They shouldn't have a single damn fan pay them a penny.  The banners they won't show on TV should be interesting.

NittanyFan

March 27th, 2017 at 3:45 PM ^

Yuck.  But Vegas doesn't have a viable stadium in the meantime.  Unless they go to Sam Boyd - with Carson, CA the NFL has definitely stretched the definition of "viable stadium."

It's a mess.  And many of the NFL's messes of late seem self-imposed.

KungFury

March 27th, 2017 at 3:47 PM ^

I think a real villain here is the Davis family. A deal isn't possible in Oakland because the tax payers won't give up as much as Vegas (and they shouldn't) and Davis can't afford to buy his own stadium. If you can't afford your own damn stadium then sell to someone who can. People hate on guys like Kroenke, but at least he is shelling out money to get what he wants.

KingTaxes

March 27th, 2017 at 3:58 PM ^

I can only imagine the joy of watching an NFL preseason game in Sam Boyd in August or an early fall regular season game.   Its still damn hot.   I live in Henderson and envision a traffic disaster if they play at Boyd.   I can only hope they play in Oakland until the new stadium is built.   

BursleysFinest

March 27th, 2017 at 3:55 PM ^

Does raise the question, Vegas home field advantage has to be at least 2 or 3 points more than regular home advantage given all of its "world-class shows and attractions"?

4godkingandwol…

March 27th, 2017 at 3:58 PM ^

... That my interest in the NFL will drop to nearly non existent when Tom Brady retires. Other than rooting for michigan players to do well, I'll have zero interest in outcomes.

smwilliams

March 27th, 2017 at 4:03 PM ^

This recent fascination with Vegas is no different than the fascination all the sports leagues had with the South in the 1990s and why many of those franchises have had issues in recent years. 

MLB added the Rays, Marlins, and Diamondbacks. The Rays basically play in a mausoleum and are a threat to move unless they get a new stadium. The Marlins have been constantly in the bottom 5 in attendance for the better part of a decade. The Diamondbacks do seem to be rather popular, however. 

NFL moved the Cardinals to Phoenix where it took 15 years and a new stadium for people to actually support the team. They added the Jags who were on the verge of moving until the new owner bought the team. Nobody went to Rams games last year and I don't think that's going to change this year. Good luck getting L.A. to support a second NFL team in the Chargers. 

The NHL is failing or has failed in Miami, Atlanta, Phoenix, and Charlotte. 

That said, there are some successes. Nashville seems to be an excellent sports town as the Titans and Predators have had success. The Lightning and Diamondbacks tend to do pretty well in Tampa and Phoenix respectively. The NBA seems to be immune as they've had success with recent relocations (Seattle to OKC, Charlotte to NOLA, Vancouver to Memphis). 

Las Vegas is the 31st largest metropolitan area in the country (nestled in between San Antonio and Cincinnati). It'll be the 5th smallest market in the league. Green Bay is a special case. The Bengals and Saints have been in town for 50 years. The franchise's best bet is they get support similar to the Titans. 

Also, this at least has a chance to work. The NHL putting a team in a desert city full of transplants when THAT FRANCHISE MODEL LITERALLY IS FAILING IN PHOENIX RIGHT NOW is the stupidest thing ever. 

TLDR: I'm sure Las Vegas residents will come out and support the team, but this is moving one of the league's premiere franchises to a smaller metropolitan area that may or may not have the local support needed to sustain a professional football franchise in the long term. It still isn't as bad of an idea as the NHL putting a team there.

xtramelanin

March 27th, 2017 at 4:15 PM ^

seems like they could close in the one end and get to 55-60K pretty easily.  rename it 'heat stroke coliseum'.   

 

In reply to by MIGHTYMOJO91

xtramelanin

March 27th, 2017 at 7:33 PM ^

you might be right.  i always wondered though how UNLV got john robinson to be their coach after he left USC.   seemed like such a huge step down.  

MichiganExile

March 27th, 2017 at 4:23 PM ^

3 NFL franchises have relocated in the past 18 months all because a bunch of rich assholes want to maximize profits and not pay for their own goddamn stadiums. This despite the fact that studies have shown public funding for stadiums does not return the investment. People wonder why many prefer college sports. This is why right here. 

UofM626

March 27th, 2017 at 4:39 PM ^

have been to many Raider games and I hate the Raiders more then anyone. But w that being said have you ever been to the Raiders stadium? If you have I am sure you would change your stance on letting them relocate. That place is by far the worse football and worse baseball stadium there is. I'm just glad the Raiders are not moving here to So Cal. It took over 10 years to get most of the scumbags and there stupid flags out of So Cal!

lhglrkwg

March 27th, 2017 at 6:29 PM ^

Seems like the Chargers and Raiders both moved now because they couldn't work out a stadium deal with taxpayer dollars. I wonder what will happen with smaller markets in the future when a new stadium is demanded like in Buffalo, New Orleans, or Jacksonville. Will those cities fork over the cash to hold onto their franchise? Will the teams move on to wherever gives them the money?

Solecismic

March 27th, 2017 at 6:29 PM ^

It's an odd financial model. Under the NFL's revenue-sharing rules, the best way to make a lot of money and keep it to yourself is to have a state-of-the-art stadium with lots of luxury boxes. Vegas is perfect for that model, which is why there's investment in the franchise despite not having the population base. The only hurdle was the long-standing unofficial rule against professional franchises where there's legal sports betting, and that is largely archaic with all the online betting these days. Doesn't surprise me. Doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as the Chargers' move. But my bigger worry is in expansion - talent dilution and not seeing rivals as often. 32 is a great number for the NFL.

uferfan

March 27th, 2017 at 6:56 PM ^

So in 25 years, they've gone from fans full of plastic, to scary fans, and now scary fans full of plastic.

Sounds like a natural progression to me.

UM Griff

March 27th, 2017 at 9:03 PM ^

The taxpayers are already on the hook for previous commitments to the team. Additionally, they are raising ticket prices dramatically while still in Oakland for the next three years. Only one owner voted against the move - and of course RG was trying to justify this in his press conference. Disgusting.

LV Sports Bettor

March 28th, 2017 at 12:32 PM ^

One more step closer to this becoming a reality...................unebelievable that the 'home of the free' still has these antiquated rules and restrictions in place in the year 2017. 

Once the NFL gives up and gets on board the rest of the professional sports leagues will give up the fight also and sports betting will eventually be legal nationally. Makes no sense to deny this isn't going on already and how it would be worth hundreds of millions. Already being done right on a global scale.

The NBA wants it and MLB is said to be on the fence and leaning for it. It's the NFL that has always been the one group fighting this from happening but moving one of their teams to LV, a city they've wanted nothing to do with in the past, proves times are FINALLY changing.